Home Blog Page 39

Did the Hogarth, Chao & Benowitz LLP Employment Contract Violate the Law?

0

The fictional law firm of Hogarth, Chao & Benowitz LLP required their attorneys to sign a “medical disclosure” clause to inform the firm of medical conditions that had the potential to affect job performance. Once Jeri Hogarth’s partners learned she had ALS, they tried to force her out of the law firm with a severance under the pretense it was their fiduciary duty to protect the law firm. See, Jessica Jones, season two, episode, AKA Sole Survivor.

There is a problem with this “medical disclosure” clause designed to terminate lawyers: it is illegal as hell.

New York law states that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer to discharge anyone from their employment because of disability or predisposing genetic characteristics. N.Y. Exec. Law § 296. Forcing employees as a condition of employment to disclose health information that can then be a pretext to fire anyone goes to the heart of protecting anyone with a “disability” from being discriminated against. There was no effort to make any reasonable accommodations for Hogarth, just remove her from the firm.

Case law has held that an employer’s failure to make reasonable accommodations for an employee is “the very societal ill which the relevant anti-discrimination statutes were designed to combat.” Jacobsen v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp., 988 N.Y.S.2d 86, 100 (2014). In a case where a police officer with Crohn’s disease that was in remission was dismissed from work, the Court found that the discrimination violated New York’s Human Rights Law. There was no evidence that the police officer could not perform his job, even if treatable symptoms occurred. Antonsen v. Ward, 569 N.Y.S.2d 328, 328, (1991).

There was no evidence that Jeri Hogarth was no longer competent to practice law. She did not have any symptoms at the time her partners confronted her. Their plan was to dismiss her from the firm, which is discriminatory conduct based on someone’s disability. As such, the contractual requirement to disclose medical conditions required the disclosure of health information that would otherwise be protected, and used as a license to discriminate against those with medical conditions.

The irony is there were valid reasons to terminate Jeri Hogarth. She had committed jury tampering, which is grounds for disbarment; asking Jessica Jones to rough up Wendy as inducement to sign a divorce agreement was a crime; having an affair with her secretary Pam was an HR nightmare waiting to happen; attempting to use Killgrave to secure Wendy’s signature on divorce papers resulted in Wendy’s death; the illegal purchase of a hand gun later used in a homicide; and the use of cocaine and three hookers are all multiple crimes. Throw in Jeri’s practice included criminal defense, patent litigation, and estates, which are all highly specialized practice areas. It would be like a doctor who is an orthodontist, vascular surgeon, and pediatrist. Sure, it is possible, just highly unlikely. Moreover, Jeri’s malpractice insurance had to be expensive.

Instead of going after Jeri for any of her serious ethical breaches as grounds for termination, Chao and Benowitz picked discrimination against someone with a disability as their beach to die on. Not the best legal strategy.

Star Wars and Kaiju Panels at WonderCon 2018!

0

Join us for our first appearance at WonderCon with two panels on March 23! Our first panel is a Star Wars Mock Trial that asks the question, “Can R2-D2 and C-3PO sue the Cantina for discrimination?” The second panel is Lawyers vs. Kaiju, where our panel of attorneys will determine who pays for Acts of Godzilla and other monstrous legal issues. Our full show schedule is below.

Star Wars Mock Trial – Can R2-D2 and C-3PO Sue the Mos Eisley Cantina for Discrimination? Friday March 23, 2018 5:00pm – 6:00pm, Room 207

Would a court rule that a droid is a “person” and protected by public accommodation laws?

United States Magistrate Judge Stacie Beckerman will hear arguments from Megan Hitchcock, Esq. and Christine Peek, Esq. (McManis Faulkner) representing R2-D2 and C-3PO, and Steve B. Chu, Esq. and Thomas Harper, Esq. (Army JAG officer) representing the Mos Eisley Cantina, to decide whether the droids can sue for Bartender Wuher’s refusal to serve them. Keri Bean (NASA JPL and R2-D2 Builders) will testify as a droid expert on whether droids are “alive.” Gordon Tarpley portrays C-3PO. Organized by Joshua Gilliland, Esq. (The Legal Geeks).

Lawyers vs. Kaiju: What is the Liability for Monster Attacks? Friday March 23, 2018 7:00pm – 8:00pm, Room 207 

Is King Kong protected by the Endangered Species Act? Does Gamera have a duty to save children?

Attorneys Monte Cooper, Esq. (Orrick and grandnephew of Merian C. Cooper, the creator of King Kong), Megan Hitchcock,Esq. (Esurance), Jeraline Singh Edwards, Esq. (Law Offices of Jeraline Singh Edwards), and Joshua Gilliland, Esq. (The Legal Geeks) do battle over John Driscoll’s liability for Kong’s rampage across New York, whether the United States has a treaty obligation to defend Japan from Godzilla, and much more. Moderated by Matt Weinhold (Monster Party).

Clients Should Not Ask a PI to Murder Anyone

0

Jessica Jones season two kicks off with a murder for hire issue in AKA Start at the Beginning. Jessica’s client is a pizzeria owner who hired Jessica to investigate whether the owner’s boyfriend/employee was having an affair. After confirming that the boyfriend was cheating on his pizza-momma, the pizzeria owner asked Jessica to kill him for playing “You’re not the regular pizza boy.”

Jessica correctly identified this request as solicitation for murder and told the client “no.” Another term is “murder for hire” and the pizzeria owner could be charged for Criminal Solicitation in the Second Degree, which is when a person, with the intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a class A felony, then asks that person to engage in such criminal conduct. N.Y. Penal Law § 100.10. As such, a district attorney would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the pizzeria owner actually intended the pizza boy be killed. People v. Kass, 874 N.Y.S.2d 475, 479 (App. Div.). As Jessica rejected the murder for hire offer, there could not be any conspiracy charges, as no conspiracy to commit murder was formed. N.Y. Penal Law § 105.15.

The pizzeria owner’s statements to Jessica were party admissions under the rules of evidence. As such, Jessica could testify to those statements in court over any hearsay objections that the pizzeria owner’s statements were out of court statements offered for the truth of the matter asserted. The pizzeria owner’s statements showed intent for the pizza boy be killed under her belief that Jessica as a vigilante killed people. While Luke Cage and Danny Rand were the Heroes for Hire, Jessica does not commit Murder for Hire.

On a very odd note, the pizza boy was indignant that he had been caught cheating, blaming the owner for having him investigated. The pizzeria owner rightly could have fired him for misuse of company resources for using pizza delivery as a cover for an affair. As a cheating deadbeat, she was well within her rights to throw him out.

Star Wars Law at Nerd Nite

0

I had the privilege of speaking at Nerd Nite East Bay on February 26, Nerd Nite San Diego on March 6, and Nerd Nite San Francisco on May 19, on Star Wars. All three presentations were recorded live. While the presentations have some of the same topics, each Nerd Nite is 70% different. Check out the links below for each recording.

Did Killmonger Commit Treason Against the US?

0

Black Panther is an amazing comic book movie that presents a complex issue of treason: Eric Killmonger is a US Born citizen, whose father was a prince of Wakanda. Eric served as a Navy SEAL and in the CIA, thus took an oath to uphold and defend the United States Constitution.

Killmonger was employed by the armors dealer Ulysses Klaw to engage in murder, theft, and obstruction of justice in England and South Korea. Killmonger then raised the legal stakes by challenging King T’Challa for the rule of Wakanda.

There are significant legal issues for a US Citizen to overthrow a foreign kingdom, even if the citizen has a claim of dual citizenship. There is an even larger issue with directing an attack on the United States.

Killmonger Violated the Logan Act with Overthrowing King T’Challa 

The Logan Act prohibits US citizens from directly or indirectly commencing correspondence with a foreign government with the “intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States…” 18 USCS § 953.

Eric Killmonger’s actions to overthrow the lawful government of Wakanda, followed by destabilizing the country with the destruction of the Wakandan Heart Shaped Herb, and declaring war on the United States and other US allies, took influencing foreign governments to defeat the measures of the United States to levels never seen before, in fact or fiction. This also raised the issue that Killmonger committed treason against the United States.

Acts of Treason

The United States Constitution defines the crime of treason as “levying War against them [The United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.” United States Constitution, Article III, Section 3.

Congress has stated that:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $ 10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

18 USCS § 2381.

Eric Killmonger had been a Navy SEAL, and if not on active duty, was at least subject to recall. Moreover, as a CIA operative, Killmonger had taken an oath to upload and defend the United States Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. This is where treason becomes odd, because the United States and Wakanda were not enemies or engaged in acts of war. That changed when Killmonger overthrew King T’Challa and directed the country of Wakanda to arm its spies in the United States and other countries to effectively conquer the world for a new Wakandan Empire. These actions are also enlistment to serve in armed hostility against the United States, with the twist that the enlistment was overthrowing a foreign government to become the head of state. 18 USCS § 2390.

These actions would be treason, plus supporting an Insurrection or Rebellion in the United States by sending advanced Wakandan weapons to arm US Citizens to overthrow the Government of the United States. Federal law prohibits anyone from inciting or engaging “in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States…” The punishment is fine or imprisonment, plus barring that individual from holding any office in the United States. 18 USCS § 2383. 

There are no cases where US service members overthrow a government and declare war on the United States. However, there are many cases of treason. One such instance was a first generation Japanese-American citizen who was found guilty of committing treason during World War II. The Defendant had traveled to Japan on a US Passport in 1939 to attend college. The Defendant started college in Japan in the March of 1941. The Defendant had renewed his US Passport twice and was registered with the Japanese police as an alien while in college. The Defendant did not finish school until 1943.  Kawakita v. United States, 343 U.S. 717, 720-721 (U.S. 1952).

Oeyama Nickel Industry Co., Ltd. employed the Defendant during the war as an interpreter who berated and physically harmed US prisoners of war who were used as slave labor. The POWs were forced to mine and process 200 carloads of ore a day in the Japanese war effort against the United States. The Defendant did not simply act as a translator towards the POW’s. His actions included, “swearing at the prisoners, beating them, threatening them, and punishing them for not working faster and harder, for failing to fill their quotas, for resting, and for slowing down.” Kawakita, at *737.

The United States Supreme Court held that the Defendant committed treason against the United States, because his actions were aimed at getting more work out of prisoners of war in order to give the Empire of Japan aid in making weapons to be used against the United States. While the Defendant’s actions were small, it is the nature of the act that is important for treason. As Justice Douglas explained:

These were not acts innocent and commonplace in appearance and gaining treasonable significance only by reference to other evidence, as in Cramer v. United States, supra. They were acts which showed more than sympathy with the enemy, more than a lack of zeal in the American cause, more than a breaking of allegiance to the United States. They showed conduct which actually promoted the cause of the enemy. They were acts which tended to strengthen the enemy and advance its interests. These acts in their setting would help make all the prisoners fearful, docile, and subservient. Because of these punishments the prisoners would be less likely to be troublesome; they would need fewer guards; they would require less watching. These acts would tend to give the enemy the “heart and courage to go on with the war.”

Kawakita, at *741-742, quoting Lord Chief Justice Treby in Trial of Captain Vaughan, 13 How. St. Tr. 485, 533.

While Killmonger’s plan failed and no Americans were killed, that does not change the fact Killmonger ORDERED an attack on the United States after overthrowing King T’Challa. These actions are treason and the US Government would have been in the right to ask for Killmonger’s extradition.

Lessons of Cruel and Unusual Punishment with Agony Booths

0

The Mirror Universe in Star Trek is known for awesome uniforms and goatees. It is also known for punishing transporter chiefs with Agonizers and throwing people in Agony Booths for torture. Star Trek Discovery’s adventure in the Mirror Universe is where the show embraced the best values of Star Trek, plus legal lessons in corporal punishment.

Enter the Agony Booth

According to Memory Alpha, Agony Booths could stimulate pain centers of the different species, where the inflicted pain was shifted from one nerve cluster to another, in order to keep the victim in a constant state of agony. Think of this like constant flogging, except the victim does not become overrun with pain.

Captain Gabriel Lorca’s revolutionaries were tortured in Agony Booths for over a year as retribution for their attempted overthrow of the Emperor. On the I.S.S. Shenzhou, crewmembers were placed in Agony Booths as punishment for unstated infractions.

In a Hornbook, Darkly

There is an ugly maritime history where crewmembers were flogged for discipline. The practice was done on both Naval warships and merchant ships. The practice was outlawed in the 19th Century. The prohibition on the Cruelty to Seaman states:

Whoever, being the master or officer of a vessel of the United States, on the high seas, or on any other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, flogs, beats, wounds, or without justifiable cause, imprisons any of the crew of such vessel, or withholds from them suitable food and nourishment, or inflicts upon them any corporal or other cruel and unusual punishment, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

18 U.S.C.S. § 2191.

The use of flogging was classified and banned under Federal law as cruel and unusual punishment:

Punishment by flogging, or by branding, marking, or tattooing on the body, or any other cruel or unusual punishment, may not be adjudged by any court-martial or inflicted upon any person subject to this chapter [10 USCS §§ 801 et seq.]. The use of irons, single or double, except for the purpose of safe custody, is prohibited.

10 U.S.C.S. § 855.

In one case from a whaling ship in 1855, a merchant sailor fell asleep while serving as a lookout for whales. The whaler was flogged as punishment. The Court stated that the flogging violated the law, in addition to other “creative” punishments that included forcing the sailor to “stand on his hands and feet, with his head to leeward; kneeling on the top of the house with his head in the funnel of the galley; and standing on deck, with a rope about his neck.” Payne v. Allen, 19 F. Cas. 11, 11-12 (D. Mass. 1855). The shipping company claimed the punishments were justified for the sailor disobeying orders, personal negligence, and general incompetence in performing his duties. While there could have been ways to reduce compensation for the sailor breaching his contract, there was no justification for the corporal punishment the sailor endured. The court awarded the sailor damages of $125, which today would be $49,555.40. Given how modern jurors would react to someone being flogged for job performance, that number would higher and someone would go to jail.

The Agony Booth is a Most Effective Means of Discipline…

Agony Booths are a rejection to the values of the fictional United Federation of Planets, in addition to the 19th Century prohibition of flogging sailors for discipline. The Terran Empire despised the weak, rejected the concept of mercy, and embraced corporal punishment to ensure efficiency. “Agony Booths” are everything that goes against the values of Star Trek, a show with a bright future where challenges can be overcome.

The USS Discovery in the Mirror Universe is where Star Trek Discovery became great. The initial theme was how being in a system that rejected everything the crew believed could change them for the worse. It was in this toxic environment that the crew demonstrated the value of life by refusing to leave others to die; it was in the Mirror Universe that the crew rejected they were in a no-win scenario; and it was in the Mirror Universe the crew worked as a team to solve multiple complex problems. This was when Star Trek Discovery became Star Trek. And it was damn awesome.

Just keep Saru in the Captain’s Chair, because it is where he belongs.

I just wish the Klingons looked consistent as they did in Enterprise, The Original Series, Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and original movies. The gold tunics with sashes from Day of the Dove, Errand of Mercy, and The Trouble with Tribbles were a ton of fun.

Did the General Contractor on the Death Star Project Have to Build the Second Death Star for Free?

1
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story..Death Star..Ph: Film Frame..©Lucasfilm LFL

Anyone familiar with the original Star Wars movies might wonder why the Empire saw the destruction of the Death Star at the conclusion of “A New Hope,” with its massive cost and fatally-flawed construction, and thought, “Hey, let’s build a second one at twice the price?” Given that the Death Star cost the equivalent of $825 quadrillion (according to Forbes), building a second one would seem fiscally irresponsible — if not wholly insane — from a certain point of view. However, revelations in the last two Star Wars films, “Rogue One” (2016) and “The Last Jedi” (2017), cast significant doubt on this long-accepted punchline. Based on some factual revelations from these movies, it’s entirely possible, even likely, that the Empire received a second Death Star free of charge — assuming the Dark Side’s lawyers had an appreciation for construction law contract principles as applied more recently in a galaxy not so far away.

To understand how the liability could have been shifted, we need to take an, ahem, empirical, look at how Imperial construction projects work in the Star Wars galaxy, the Death Star design and construction process, and the common law and statutory principles at play here.

[SPOILERS ABOUND BELOW – DON’T SAY WE DIDN’T WARN YOU]

A. The Death Star May Have Been a Public-Private Partnership.

While it is common in the real world for public projects, including military construction projects, to be completed wholly or in part by private companies, the Star Wars galaxy has always been vague on this issue until recently.

For background, in this galaxy, the current go-to for public works is the use of a public-private partnership (known as “PPP” or “P3”). This construction project delivery method cleverly utilizes a long-term partnership between the governmental owner and a private developer for the design, build, financing, operation, and maintenance of a substantial public improvement work. Typically, a P3 project is built on public land and involves the construction and operation of public infrastructure with a projected revenue stream that is used to help secure and repay the project costs over time. (We assume that the Star Wars galaxy has an Outer Space Treaty similar to ours, providing that space and celestial bodies cannot be claimed by nations, and are thus public spaces). Although P3 projects often involve financing by the private developer (often called “concessionaire”), the final project usually remains under public ownership.  While P3 projects are most commonly associated with infrastructure projects like roads, bridges, tunnels, railways, hospitals, schools, and the like, there have also been military applications — particularly in military housing, transportation, and (in certain instances) tactical vehicles, aircraft, and weaponry.

Plot points in “The Last Jedi” lend further credibility to the conclusion that Luke Skywalker’s galaxy operates just like this, at least with respect to how the galactic government completes public works and military projects.

“The Last Jedi” established how the First Order (as successor-in-interest to the Empire) acquired its ultimate weapons. During the search for a master codebreaker, Resistance fighters Finn and Rose come across the morally ambiguous “DJ”, played wonderfully by Benicio del Toro. In just a few scenes, he reveals that a complex system of private contractors selling raw materials as well as “fully armed and operational” military technology supports the First Order’s military and governmental power. Not only that, but these private individuals and companies are paid for completing these contracts. This is made even clearer when DJ, who betrays Rose and Finn later in the movie, provides some additional software coding to the First Order so that they may detect the Resistance ships through hyperspace in exchange for credits and a new transport ship.

While these are relatively minor plot points, they have immense implications in the structure of the public-private contracts in the Star Wars galaxy. Since the Death Star is effectively a weapons system, a ship, and a moon-sized barracks built in a public space, it has sufficient public-private aspects that it may have been developed as a P3. That said, even if the Death Star was not an explicit public-private partnership, the existence of private military contracting opens up an entire new world (galaxy?) when it comes to contractual responsibility for defects in the final product.

“Rogue One,” the stand-alone anthology film about the Rebellion’s successful theft of the complete plans for the first Death Star, provides some critical revelations about the weapon system’s design and construction. In the opening scene, we learn that Galen Erso had originally been a voluntary private contractor for the Empire to develop the Death Star, though he is ultimately kidnapped and compelled to return and complete the project. Setting aside the coercive nature of the subsequent contract negotiations, the material fact is that Galen Erso was contracted as a private citizen to complete the project, not as an employee of the government.

To understand how this relates to the second Death Star, we have to look at the contractual terms of the first Death Star project.

B. Be Careful Not to Choke on Your Assignment of Risk in Design and Construction of the Death Star.

In typical construction projects, the prime contract documents assign the scope of risk to one or more of three groups of parties: the owner/developer (the Empire), the design professionals (Galen Erso and his team), and the general contractor and its subcontractors. There are usually a wide array of modifications, exclusions, and indemnity provisions that further complicate the obligations of the parties. And when projects become as large and complex as the Death Star, these contracts become similarly large and complex. But rather than try to drill down to all the complexities, we will focus on three key issues that are most relevant: inspections, defect discovery, and warranties.

All construction projects involve both internal and external inspections. External inspections are generally statutory/regulatory in nature, and intended to ensure compliance with building codes and the approved plans. Internal inspections are generally contractual obligations assumed by one or more of the parties based on the contract provisions. Typically, the general contractor is obligated to inspect its work as well as the work of its subcontractors to ensure it meets the construction specifications and comports with the construction drawings. Well-drafted prime contracts require the general contractor to notify the owner of errors, omissions, or other conflicts within the various contract documents. In practice, this encompasses the design documents, specifications, and construction drawings. These duties are limited to such errors and omissions that the general contractor discovers, or should have reasonably discovered, during the construction process. Finally, once work is completed, the general contractor’s work is subject to some form of contractually defined warranty against defective worksmanship, which includes compliance with the other contractual obligations, including inspections and discovery of defects. The warranty period is contract-specific, though generally lasts at least one year.

(Obviously, the assignment of much of the risk discussed above plays out in additional insurance policies and indemnity agreements that may or may not be project-specific or based on contractor or owner controlled insurance programs. However, that analysis would require more knowledge about insurance laws in the Star Wars galaxy, something Rian Johnson did not get around to in Episode VIII. Perhaps the Solo film will get into insurance rules when Han drops his shipment at the first sight of an Imperial cruiser, but until then, we will table that issue.)

The big reveal of “Rogue One,” however, was that Galen Erso intentionally designed the Death Star with a fatal structural flaw and made significant efforts to ensure the Rebellion knew about it. Galen Erso was successful in hiding the design flaw and as seen spectacularly at the end of “A New Hope,” neither the general contractor that won the contract for the Death Star project, nor any of the relevant subcontractors, noticed the flaw during construction. And here is where the great disturbance in the work force from “The Last Jedi” changes how the Empire paid for the second Death Star.

C. I Find Your Lack of Liability Exclusions Disturbing.

Construction contracts always contain liability exceptions for things like acts of war (or terrorism, depending on what the legal status of the Rebellion would be). To many project owners, exclusions may be viewed as the path to the Dark Side.

For military contracts, there are certain limitations on liability of private contractors for design and manufacture of military equipment since such equipment is generally subjected to extreme conditions, like say, IEDs, X-wing wingtip lasers and proton torpedoes. See Boyle v. United Technologies Corporation, 487 U.S. 500, 512 (1988); Snell v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., 107 F.3d 744, 747 (9th Cir. 1997). Similarly, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 created a comparable type of exemption for alleged defects in approved anti-terrorism technologies under the SAFETY Act. See 6 U.S.C. § 442(d). The general underlying principle is that private contractors cannot be held liable for alleged design or construction defects so long as the designs specifications were reasonably precise, the equipment conformed to the design, and the usage dangers associated with the design are disclosed to the government.

Perhaps, in this galaxy, that would be the end of the potential liability. However, there are two unique aspects to the Death Star that change this analysis. First, as Admiral Motti (look him up) pointed out right before getting choked out by Darth Vader, the Death Star is the “ultimate power in the universe.” From this, we can reasonably infer the Death Star had specific design specifications to withstand direct attack by known weapons of the Rebel Alliance once construction was complete (yes, the second Death Star needed a shield generated from the forest moon of Endor, but that space station was not completed, only fully armed and operational). Second, we know that the design defect was placed intentionally and supposedly was “so small and powerful, [the Empire] will never find it.”

Based on these facts, we safely can assume that: (1) the Empire’s specifications would not have agreed to any act of war or terrorism exception post-completion; and (2) the Death Star’s design defect was not part of the Empire’s specifications. Additionally, the warranty provisions in the prime contract likely would have included some explicit statement that the Death Star was warranted to withstand any and all known military weapons available to the Rebel Alliance upon final completion for a certain period of time (any lawyer worth their imperial credits would draft a separate schedule identifying these weapons). Given that the Death Star lasted less than a year, there is little chance that it survived the warranty period. Also, given that the Death Star was destroyed by two proton torpedoes fired from a single X-wing fighter (the primary fighter jet of the Rebel Alliance), it is likely these weapons would have been included in the warranty schedule. With this in mind, we can reasonably conclude that the Empire was not on the hook for the construction costs of the second Death Star.

D. So Who Shot First (in Terms of Final Liability)?

Ultimate liability for the flawed Death Star will depend on who had the final duty to inspect the work and identify design and construction defects during the project, and whether that party should have reasonably identified the fatal defect. Both sides will have an interesting argument.

On the one hand, there is no question that Galen Erso’s design was defective, and intentionally so. Thus, there seems a clear basis for liability against the design professionals. Additionally, since the defect was so small, it would likely qualify as a latent defect if you had the evidence.

On the other hand, the general contractor almost certainly assumed a duty to inspect and notify the Empire of any design defects it discovered in the shop drawings used for construction. The general contractor would also have a contractual obligation to construct to the Empire’s specifications. Thus, if the defect was something that a reasonably skilled contractor ought to have discovered, the liability shifts to the general contractor. As we know, the design defect is supposedly hidden, which should absolve the general contractor from most liability. However, since Director Krennic killed all the design professionals, and the only other pieces of evidence of the design intent (Galen Erso’s message and the full Death Star schematics) were ironically destroyed by the Death Star during its first firing test on Jedha and subsequent destruction of the Imperial records installation on Scarif, it might be difficult to prove intent, or even the existence of a design defect. Obviously both sides would seek out expert opinions, but faced with the dearth of design evidence, the likely outcome would be liability against the general contractor.

E. Imperial Law Is Not As Forgiving As Darth Vader.

As for the appropriate remedy, given that the Death Star did not conform to the Empire’s specifications and did not survive its warranty period, the general contractor would likely be liable. However, the Empire might have multiple remedies. The most straightforward remedy would be an award of damages. Alternatively, depending on the contractual language, the Empire might be able to get a judgment compelling specific performance, including construction of the second Death Star. (Of course, contractual provisions in the real world cannot compel actual labor as a constitutional prohibition on indentured servitude and contracts provide for an alternative remedy if the general contractor refuses to complete the corrective or warranty work.) That said, the Empire does not appear to have the same constitutional limitations and it is entirely possible that an Imperial court would order the Death Star general contractor to satisfy its contractual obligations. In either case, assuming there were sufficient physical resources, the Empire got its second Death Star for free.

As for the later Starkiller Base developed by the First Order as the sole surviving faction of the Empire, that project would likely have bigger issues dealing with environmental groups after revealing that the First Order literally destroyed stars to fuel that weapon. But whether that project passes muster is a question for another episode.

 

 

Michael R. Hogue is a senior associate with Greenberg Traurig’s San Francisco and Las Vegas offices and focuses his practice on construction and real estate law, representing owners and commercial developers in contracting, litigation, and debt restructuring and bankruptcy matters for medium and large-scale projects. He is also an unapologetic devotee to the geek triumvirate: Star Wars, Doctor Who, and Batman. Although only occasionally one with the force, he is definitely a madman with a box. When necessary, he is also a night-stalking, crime-fighting vigilante, and a heavy metal rapping machine.

 

Special Thanks to Katharine Malone, Esq., for her help in preparing this article.

Katharine is a litigation associate in Greenberg Traurig’s San Francisco office. Her practice focuses on commercial litigation matters,  particularly contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duties, and employee mobility issues.  She is an avid fan of Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, and a Wrinkle in Time.  She spends her free time hoarding books, taking her dog, Abby, to the beach, and working out the rules of True American and Cones of Dunshire.  She is still upset about midi-chlorians.